|
|
Post by Dr. Nemmers on Jun 25, 2024 22:23:15 GMT
If you've reached the end of the novel, you know what happens to Fred Daniels: he's executed by the police and falls into the sewer.
Now that we have read a few stories, we have seen this ending over and over again: Peyton Farquhar hung to death over the Owl Creek Bridge; the man from "To Build a Fire" freezing to death; Macleod being shot to death at the end of Barbary Shore.
Any thoughts on the trope we're encountering here? Seems to be a lot of solitary men who strive to rebel against society/ nature, and wind up paying the price...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rylee Wenzel on Jun 26, 2024 20:28:11 GMT
This seems to be such a common theme within Existentialism as you pointed out. I think the grim nature of these novels and characters is what makes them very real. There are no hopeful or happy endings because maybe the point is that happy endings are not that common in real life. Another thing to note is that rebelling against society is often looked down upon, in any case, people are expected to do what others would. They are expected to keep in line in order to keep the peace. And, as in these stories, the ultimate consequence for this is death.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjunious on Jun 26, 2024 21:41:07 GMT
To add on, I think these endings speak to a common thread that runs through the foundation of not only existentialism, but many philosophies, which is that in the end...we die. However contrasting existentialism with another philosophical thought such as, say, fatalism, the unique difference with existentialism seems to be that instead a predetermination, the individual can forge their own path to the end. When these people are gone, they will be remembered by the choices they made; were they willing to stand up and take action for the cause they believed in, were they [foolishly] adventurous, or trying to protect an ideology? So I think what the authors of these stories want us to do is contemplate what the characters lives mean. Although the endings are the same do we define everyone by their end or the decisions that brought them to their respective ends?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Nemmers on Jun 27, 2024 2:58:18 GMT
Right, I think some good points here for sure. I agree with Rylee that death seems to be the punishment for rebellion. And I'm with Mitchell as well that death seems to be a natural outcome of life, and of these lives in particular.
Just to finish with our theme of rebellion for this week, it seems to suggest that meaning has to be created by action-- it's not something that's inherently there. (We'll learn about this with "essence precedes existence"). But the action and the decision and the rebellion is something created by the protagonists here.
Also, pretty much everyone we've seen seems to be alone: often because they've taken a journey but other times because they've been abandoned or chosen that path. I'd say that adds to Mitchell's point about how many existentialists have the end in mind....
|
|
